Suppr超能文献

评估五种评分系统对阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停低通气综合征进行预筛查的性能。

Evaluating the performance of five scoring systems for prescreening obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome.

作者信息

Wang Wenjing, Yuan Shan, Le Grange Jehane Michael, Zheng Haiying, Yao Tianci, Peng Wei, Zhang Jinnong

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China.

Department of Emergency Medicine, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430022, China.

出版信息

Sleep Breath. 2021 Sep;25(3):1685-1692. doi: 10.1007/s11325-020-02227-6. Epub 2020 Oct 29.

Abstract

PURPOSE

A comparison of all scoring systems used for screening for obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) is lacking. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the performance of five scoring systems for screening for OSAHS, as well as to validate the use of the NoSAS and SACS in the Chinese population.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected from hospital-based, manned, overnight sleep monitoring studies for 105 consecutive outpatients using a portable monitor (PM) device.

RESULTS

The 105 participants had an average age of 46 years and were mostly men (75%). STOP-Bang, SACS, and NoSAS scoring exhibited moderate predictive values at different AHI cutoffs (AUC 0.761-0.853, 0.722-0.854, and 0.724-0.771 respectively), followed by the STOP and Berlin questionnaire (AUC 0.680-0.781vs 0.624-0.724). Both STOP-Bang and SACS showed excellent sensitivity (89.5-100% vs 93.4-94.6%) and negative predictive value (68-100% vs 77.3-90.9%), while STOP-Bang, STOP, and SACS showed low negative likelihood ratios (- LR) (0-0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicated that the STOP-Bang questionnaire and the SACS both show better predictive value than other scoring systems among the five screening tools for OSAHS. Both scoring systems are simple and easy to implement for screening for OSAHS in the community and in hospitals.

摘要

目的

目前缺乏对用于阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停低通气综合征(OSAHS)筛查的所有评分系统的比较。本研究的目的是评估五种OSAHS筛查评分系统的性能,并在中国人群中验证NoSAS和SACS的应用。

方法

回顾性收集了连续105例门诊患者使用便携式监测仪(PM)进行的基于医院的夜间睡眠监测研究数据。

结果

105名参与者的平均年龄为46岁,大多数为男性(75%)。在不同的呼吸暂停低通气指数(AHI)临界值下,STOP-Bang、SACS和NoSAS评分显示出中等预测价值(AUC分别为0.761 - 0.853、0.722 - 0.854和0.724 - 0.771),其次是STOP和柏林问卷(AUC分别为0.680 - 0.781和0.624 - 0.724)。STOP-Bang和SACS均显示出极佳的敏感性(89.5 - 100%对93.4 - 94.6%)和阴性预测值(68 - 100%对77.3 - 90.9%),而STOP-Bang、STOP和SACS显示出较低的阴性似然比(-LR)(0 - 0.2)。

结论

我们的研究表明,在OSAHS的五种筛查工具中,STOP-Bang问卷和SACS的预测价值均优于其他评分系统。这两种评分系统在社区和医院筛查OSAHS时都简单易行。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验